Hi Clément, Clément Lassieur <[email protected]> skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès <[email protected]> writes: > >> Excellent, thanks for working on this! This looks great to me, and I >> think the pros outweigh the cons. Did you check on a big database how >> well it performs? > > Yes, I didn't see any difference. When I use Berlin's database, it > works well but crashes quickly for another reason (lack of disk space I > think, and /tmp being tmpfs). Sounds good (not that it crashes, but that you didn’t see any difference ;-)). >> I think I find it nicer to keep the ‘db’ parameter everywhere (except >> that it’s now a channel instead of an actual database) rather than using >> this global variable. >> >> WDYT? > > That 'db' parameter made sense before, because there were different > database connections: one per fiber. But now that there is only one > global channel accessible from everywhere, I can't find any use for a > 'db-channel' parameter. > > Also, using two differents channels for the same database would be a > bug, it would break the serialization mechanism. > > And I don't think using several databases (with one channel per > database) would make sense either. These are all good points, indeed. I’m mildly reluctant to the global parameter, but if you prefer it that way, I don’t mind; the end result matters more than this tiny issue anyway! So: LGTM. Thank you! Ludo’.
